Faculty of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences

Internal communication and its effects on the environmental CSR commitments of organisations – The employees' perspective

Ulrika Lindstam

Department of Urban and Rural Development Master’s Thesis • 30 HEC Environmental Communication and Management - Master’s Programme Uppsala 2016

Internal communication and its effects on organizations environmental CSR commitments of orgnisations- The employee’s perspective

Ulrika Lindstam

Supervisor:

Examiner:

Lars Hallgren, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Urban and Rural Development

Lotten Westberg, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Urban and Rural Development

Credits: 30 HEC

Level: Second cycle (A2E)

Course title: Independent Project in Environmental Sciences - Master’s thesis

Course code: EX0431

Programme/Education: Environmental Communication and Management – Master’s Programme

Place of publication: Uppsala

Year of publication: 2016

Online publication: http://stud.epsilon.slu.se

Keywords: internal communication, organization, CSR commitments, horizontal communication

Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

Faculty of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences Department of Urban and Rural Development

3

Abstract Internal communication is conducted between employees when they interact and exchange

information. The communication keeps an organization going and is able to produce an outcome.

Therefore, internal communication is essential for any organization in order to be able to achieve their

commitments. This study is aimed to describe how environmental CSR commitments are affected by

the horizontal internal communication within an organization.

In order to answer this has a qualitative research approach been used with semi-structured interviews.

The horizontal internal communication is studied at an international consulting business where

employees have participated in interviews.

The study shows that environmental CSR commitments of the organization are affected by staff

defined environmental aspects in different and sometimes contradicting terms. Different

understanding and opinions within the organization have resulted in inefficient and restricted

horizontal internal communication. Discordant staff has in turn also affected the priority of

environmental aspects within team activities. Employees are not on the same side in how environment

should be included in team activities which lead to situations where employees choose not to bring up

environmental aspects because they know it’s going to cause resistance from other peers.

Division and resistance also make the horizontal integration weak between units in the organization

which aggravate cooperation in the horizontal internal communication. This is evident in different

team activities team folder where names on documents and subfolders often are confusing and it takes

time for employees to find information. Aggravation of cooperation also occurs in and around

meetings when information doesn’t reach employees who need it. However, cooperation is facilitated

in situations where employees help each other to find information. Relations are important for

cooperation but today many employees in the organization communicate without any acquaintance.

The cooperation would gain from having more diverse experiencies of communicating with each

other, which also the interviewees agree on.

Keywords: internal communication, organization, environmental CSR commitments, horizontal

communication

4

Foreword I want to thank the people that have supported and helped me through this study. All help have been

appreciated and foremost I want to thank my supervisor at SLU, Lars Hallgren at the department of

Urban and Rural Development for good consultations.

Great thanks to my contact person in the organization that helped me to develop the idea of the study

and to find employees that could participate in the interviews.

Last but not least I want to thank the employees at the organization who wanted to participate and be

interviewed in this study, without you this study would not been possible to perform.

Uppsala, May 2016 Ulrika Lindstam

5

Table of contents

Abstract

Foreword

Tabel of content………………………………………………………….5

1 Introduction .................................................................................. 7

1.1 Background ................................................................................................. 7 1.2 Aim…. ......................................................................................................... 8

2 Concerning corporate social responsibility .............................. 9

3 Theories ...................................................................................... 11

3.1 Internal communication and its importance in organizations .................... 11 3.2 Corporate communication ......................................................................... 12 3.3 Cooperation in organizations .................................................................... 13 3.4 Communication across subunits ............................................................... 14 3.5 Communication channels ......................................................................... 14 3.6 How the theory is used in the study .......................................................... 15

4 Method ........................................................................................ 17

4.1 Qualitative research approach .................................................................. 17 4.2 Semi-structured interviews ....................................................................... 17 4.3 Sample ...................................................................................................... 19 4.4 Interview execution ................................................................................... 19 4.5 Data treatment and analysis ..................................................................... 19

5 Results and discussion ............................................................. 21

5.1 Communication between units ................................................................. 21 5.2 Employee’s interpretation of corporate communication ........................... 22 5.3 Priority of environmental aspects ............................................................. 23 5.4 Cooperation .............................................................................................. 24

5.4.1 Relationships ................................................................................................ 25

5.4.2 Information system Portalen ......................................................................... 26

5.4.3 Meetings ....................................................................................................... 27

6 Conclusions ............................................................................... 29

References...................................................................................... 30

Appendix 1...................................................................................... 33

6

7

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

People have changed their view on organizations in the past decades, which have resulted

in a society that demands transparency in management of organizations (Cunningham et al.,

2010). Organizations have answered to this and increased their transparency with

implementing corporate social responsibility (CSR) document, where stakeholders can take

part of organizations environmental, social and ethical responsibilities (Arvidsson, 2010).

But in order to successfully reach good organizational performance of CSR commitments

the internal communication is crucial (Smith et al., 2008).

The world is facing environmental problems as global warming, air pollution and

contamination. This is nothing new and something we hear more or less every day. This has

caused severe threats towards the planet and its environment. Therefore it’s important to

deal with human actions within society. (Cunningham et al., 2010) At the same time global

environmental problems escalated, there has been technological development which has

made the world dramatically smaller. This has affected all parts of the globe but especially

been beneficial for organizations. (Dicken, 2011) Organizations are created by people’s

own interests or advantages in situations where they realise that the best way to achieve

their goals are through collective work and not individually (Abrahamsson et al., 2005).

Organizations have developed together with the technology which has resulted in many

organizations being active on an international level. This has resulted in changed

production, consumption and transportation patterns all over the globe. (Dicken, 2011)

People’s awareness of environmental and social situations on earth has increased during the

21st century (Cunningham et al., 2010), and raised many questions for these organizational

patterns among the public. For example organizations’ relationship with other

organizations, work conditions and affects on society and the environment (Dicken, 2011).

This has created public mistrust and caused substantial pressure on organizations when it

comes to environmental, social and ethical responsibility.

Many organizations have answered to this public demand and started to be more transparent

about their responsibilities towards environmental, social and ethical activities through

CSR document (Arvidsson, 2010). CSR is said to be voluntary commitments that

organizations take on beyond external regulations (Idowu et al., 2013). According to the

European commission (2016) CSR is defined as “the responsibility of enterprises for their

impact in society”. In an organization to fully meet their CSR they need to have a process

where social, environmental, ethical, human rights and customers concerns are integrated in

their operation of the business (European Commission, 2016).

For organizations to achieve their CSR commitments the internal communication is an

important part (Smith et al., 2008). Internal communication is an important process within

8

organizations. It’s what produces, maintains and reproduces the organization, in other

words it keeps the organization floating and going. (Johansson, 2003) This study refers to

internal communication as a complex social process of interactions between people where

information is created and exchanged. With efficient and structured internal communication

organizations can reach success of implemented CSR commitments (Borca et al., 2014).

Internal communication can flow in several ways within an organization. These are vertical,

diagonal, lateral or horizontal. (Altinöz, 2008) Horizontal internal communication allows

organizations to carry out and fulfill their tasks (Altinöz, 2008). In order to fulfil CSR

commitments there need to be visible and accessible information about them for the

employees. This can be achieved through corporate communication. (Arvidsson, 2010)

Corporate communication starts with the superiors who send messages to employees. This

means that the communication is vertical but essential for larger organization so all

employees have a clear and united understanding. Without corporate communication the

horizontal internal communication can be inefficient. (Welch et al., 2007) Moreover, it’s

the horizontal internal communication that contributes to a prosperous climate within

organizations (Altinöz, 2008). According to Collier et al. (2007) the main part of the

responsibility lies with the employees to implement ethical corporate behaviour which is

necessary to achieve CSR commitments. But how employees create and exchange

information will benefit or aggravate the internal communication (Welch, 2012). Weak

internal communication can result in work inefficiency, which is a real concern for

organizations (Welch et al., 2007). Therefore, the internal communication is important and

affects both performances and commitments in organizations (Welch et al., 2007; Borca et

al., 2014).

1.2 Aim

The aim of this study is to describe how environmental CSR commitments are affected by

the horizontal internal communication within an organization.

The aim will be fulfilled through answering the following questions:

- How is environmental aspects prioritized in horizontal internal communications within an

organization?

- How does the horizontal internal communication facilitate or aggravate cooperation?

- How does the interpretation of corporate communication about environmental CSR

commitments affect the horizontal internal communication?

Empirically the horizontal internal communication is studied at an international consulting

business in Uppsala. The organization consists of several subsidiary companies that

together have over 10000 employees. As a consulting business every subsidiary company is

specialized within a certain expertise. To complete each consulting mission is the needed

expertise from the subsidiary companies put together into a team.

9

2 Concerning corporate social responsibility

Organizations behaviour and management of their business have never been questioned as

much as it is today. Humans have consumed natural resources and contaminated the

environment for a long time. Not until people noticed that contaminations and pollutions

are able to move through air, soil and water from one location to another it got attention.

People started to understand that distance to the source didn’t matter. (Cunningham et al.,

2010) Through alarming reports have scandals as increasing consumption and pollution,

companies exploitation of child labour and vast management bonuses been known all over

the world (Arvidsson, 2010). People are nowadays aware of what is happening in the world

and have knowledge about environmental and social problems (Cunningham et al., 2010).

The awareness of these scandals has resulted in mistrust in how organizations are managed

(Arvidsson, 2010). This has resulted in CSR policies and commitments where organizations

review how they manage their business for external as well as internal stakeholder. CSR

have made organizations more transparent to their surroundings. (Kolja, 2010)

The concept corporate social responsibility (CSR) has historically been around for a long

time but it’s during the 21st century the concept has developed and become more used in

society (Carroll, 1999). CSR can be said to be voluntary commitments that organizations

take on beyond external regulations (Idowu et al., 2013). According to Idowu et al. (2013)

and Kolja (2010) the concept CSR is overlapping several other concepts as corporate

citizenship, business ethics, social and environmental responsibility and sustainability just

to mention a few. Therefore, the concept is contested and authors do not agree on how CSR

should be defined (Kolja, 2010). This study will refer to CSR in line with the European

commission’s description because the European commission has a close cooperation with

stakeholders in managing the CSR file and follow the development in society. The

European commission (2016) defines CSR as “the responsibility of enterprises for their

impact in society”. For organizations to fully meet their corporate social responsibilities

they need to have a process where social, environmental, ethical, human rights and

customers concerns are integrated in the operation of the business. (European Commission,

2016)

Motives for organizations to take on CSR commitments can be very different. CSR can

improve organizations reputation in its surroundings. (Kolja, 2010) Many organizations

want to satisfy their customers and stakeholders and prevent to get negative statements

from media or intervention from government (Idowu et al., 2013; Arvidsson, 2010). Good

social reputation can prevent negative statements and instead inform stakeholders of the

organization that their investments are something good for society. Another motive is that a

good CSR is likely to be rewarded by both current and future employees. If a good climate

is created through ethical commitments among employees it will build trust in an

organization. In turn trust leads to dedicated employees, job satisfaction and higher

productivity which lead to higher profitability. The last motive is that organizations adopt

10

CSR policies to gain financial profit. If an organization successfully creates a good climate

for the employees and a good social reputation it will result in positive effects about their

reputation. In the long run will a good reputation increase financial aspects. (Kolja, 2010)

For an organization to be able to show the public that they are taking social responsibility

through CSR commitments, the commitments need to be communicated to the employees

(Arvidsson, 2010). Employee’s perceptions of CSR commitments affect organizations

corporate performance. When the understanding of CSR commitments is aligned among the

employees, the chance is bigger that others will see the organization as effectively

executing CSR. (Lee et al., 2013) The employees also need to be motivated and committed

in order to collaborate and perform CSR commitments effectively. Organizations can

ensure motivation and commitment among the employees by embedding ethical

cooperation within the organizations culture. This is achieved through well corporate

communication from the superiors. (Collier et al., 2007) If CSR commitments are not well

handled within organizations it can affect the organizational performance negatively

(Arvidsson, 2010).

11

3 Theories

In this paragraph the theories of the study will be presented. The theories are chosen in an

attempt to clarify the research questions of this study whilst helping to explain a situation of

horizontal internal communication within an organization.

3.1 Internal communication and its importance in organizations

Within an organization internal communication is an important process. To separate

internal communication from an organization is more or less impossible since it’s the

communications that produce, maintain and reproduce the organization. (Johansson, 2003)

Despite internal communication is essential for an organization to reach success and there is

no specific definition of the concept (Johansson, 2003; Goldhaber, 1989). Authors refer to

internal communication in different ways which give the concept a wide range of meanings.

However, there are some features that most of the perceptions have in common. First,

internal communication is a complex open system that influences its environment and the

other way around. Second, internal communication involves flow of messages and their

direction, purpose and media. Third and last, internal communication involves people and

their attitudes, relationships, feelings and skills. (Goldhaber, 1989) This study will refer to

internal communication as a complex social process of interactions between people where

information is created and exchanged.

To acheive successful internal communication it’s important to understand the purpose of

an organization. (Borca et al., 2014) Organizations are created by peoples own interests in

situations where they realise that the best way to achieve goals will be through collective

work (and not individual). There are many different definitions of organization that can be

used. To ease the process towards a definition four common features can be identified about

organizations. First, organizations are established to reach goals. Second, organizations are

social units put together by positions that work together. Third, organizations are structured

deliberately and carefully coordinated. Fourth, organizations exist as a small part in a larger

social surrounding. (Abrahamsson et al., 2005) Therefore, the definition of an organization

in this following study is: organization is a structured social unit that design goals and

commitments that a group of people work together in order to achieve.

The main objective with internal communication is to inform employees about the

organizations commitments and goals so these can be achieved (Borca et al., 2014). Internal

communication can flow in three ways within an organization. These are vertical, diagonal

and lateral. Vertical communication goes either from superiors to subordinates or the other

way around and the communication goes through different hierarchal levels.

Communication from superiors often intends to inform subordinates about the

organizations goals and policies but also to evaluate the subordinate’s performance.

12

Communication from subordinates intends to inform senior managers of what is going on at

subordinate levels. (Altinöz, 2008)

The second communication flow is diagonal and occurs between superiors and subordinates

of different functional units. This kind of communication helps different units in an

organization to understand each others responsibilities, but also facilitate cooperation. This

communication is very useful for organizations working in teams, which then help

participants to produce useful results. Diagonal communication makes it easier for team

work to see issues from different perspectives which could give a more full analysis of a

situation. (Altinöz, 2008)

The third communication flow is lateral or horizontal communication which occurs on a

daily basis between people on equal levels in the organization and develops from functional

relations. Horizontal communication appears most often within or between work groups or

between group members from different units. The goal of horizontal internal

communication is organizational coordination and problem solving, which will lead to

more efficient internal communication. The communication also helps out with developing

functional relations among employees. (Altinöz, 2008)

Without horizontal internal communication an organization can not carry out their activities

in a more efficient way (Altinöz, 2008). An efficient and structured internal communication

helps organizations to reach success of their activities. (Borca et al., 2014) One way to

assess effectiveness of internal communication is by looking at meaning, messages and

media. Meaning is about understanding, involvement and commitments and how this might

influence behaviour. Messages refer to organizational strategy and objectives send

throughout the entire organization. Media communication is channels that are used.

(Walker, 2009)

3.2 Corporate communication

In order for an organization to achieve effective internal communication the employees are

essential. Employee’s way of thinking and acting will affect the commitments of an

organization and therefore it is important to make them feel that they are important and

valuable. (Borca et al., 2014) This can be achieved through corporate communication which

is a part of internal communication. Corporate communication starts with superiors who

send messages to the employees about for example objectives or commitments. This means

that the communication is vertical but essential for a larger organization so the employees

have a clear and united understanding of the organizations needs. (Welch et al., 2007) It

also gives preconditions to an effective horizontal internal communication. Employees need

to have directions in order to know how to work and in which direction. (Borca et al., 2014)

Without this management it’s likely that the horizontal internal communication will not be

efficient enough (Welch et al., 2007). Corporate internal communication has a value in that

it treats the employee’s to attain the objectives and commitments of the organization.

(Abdullah et al., 2012) Lack of communication can result in misunderstandings between

employees, therefore it is crucial for superiors to communicate with the employees (Ince et

al., 2011). In order to facilitate communication both from managers to employees and

between employees, different kinds of platforms can be provided within organizations. This

also helps to motivate the employees to be committed to the organization and its objectives.

(Borca et. al., 2014) In order for this internal communication to work well between

employees cooperation is an important aspect (Tjosvold et al., 2003).

13

3.3 Cooperation in organizations

Cooperation helps organizations to achieve their goals and commitments in an efficient

way. It involves supportive, helpful and integrative actions which will lead to strong

interpersonal relationships and to help the team or organization to succeed with a task. In

other words cooperation is when people work well together and create relationships that

help them to succeed with their tasks. When peolpe cooperate and are interested in each

others success their actions are likely to be more effective. People also start to understand

when their goals with work tasks are related with other peoples goals within an

organization and their own work will benefit from helping others to succeed. The result is

when one succeed others can succeed. It is when employees first exchange their abilities

and discuss their differences cooperatively they all can benefit by working together.

(Tjosvold et al., 2003) Benefits that can be received out of cooperation within organizations

are among others accurate communication, mutual support and assistance, division of

labour, open discussions and identification of problems (West et al., 2003). Cooperation

also contributes to effective participation which results in more discussions about different

issues (Tjosvold, 1998). Strong cooperative team productivity comes from the individual’s

freedom of expression which contributes to a high quality of the team work and

productivity in the organization. Cooperative work can also lead to integration of

organizational members and gain their commitment if a rich and rewarded environment is

provided. (Tjosvold et al., 2003)

Managing cooperation in an organization is not easy. Employees are often asked to work

together as a team across disciplinary boundaries. (Leung et al., 2003) At the same time

diversity can make a cooperative organization more productive (Joshi et al., 2003). To

achieve cooperation every employee and leader in an organization or team need to be on the

same side. This means that they all have to choose to work cooperatively with each other

and develop ways to assist each other and deal with inevitable conflicts. (Tjosvold et al.,

2003) The importance of knowing each other and each organizational member’s role will

lead to improved internal communication. Things that can distract this in organizations are

for example change of staff. Change of staff can affect the horizontal internal

communication between employees especially when working together during a longer time.

It breaks the continuity in the work and important information can be left out. (Lloyd et al.,

2003) Through collaboration managers and employees can deal with cooperation by

developing some reinforced ingredients, as positively related goals, open interactions,

mutually support and both individual and team success. Everyone in a cooperation should

feel that they are mutually bound together with the others and the feeling “are in this

together” should be established. Other demands that essential for an organization to work

cooperatively are that employees have to be respectful and sensitive to each other so strong

trusting relationship can be developed. (Tjosvold et al., 2003) With this comes

responsibility which is essential in organizations collaboration towards commitments.

Employees need to take responsibility for their behaviour and actions within the

organization and make sure that ethical corporate behaviour is conducted in the every day

work. (Collier et al., 2007)

The opposite of cooperation is competition which means that people see their goals

separated to others with no connection. With this kind of thinking people often conclude

that they are better off when others act ineffectively. These people also keep information

and ideas to them selves just to win the competition which can stop other people from

effective actions. This can result in hostility among employees and restricted

communication. (Tjosvold et al., 2003)

In groups of people working together in organizations there is a variation of perspectives on

how to understand the reality, therefore it should be expected that there are some

communication problems (Johansson, 2003). When people misunderstand each other it

14

often leads to meta-communication. Meta-communication is defined as information about

information. Meta-communication can occur in several ways. Written texts often have a

message with an explanation. For example if a picture is the message there is also often

information or instructions to explain the picture. Meta-communication also occurs

verbally. However, written language often involves more meta-communication since it’s

hard to emphasise certain words as when speaking. Meta-communication is not only

information communicated, it also imposes behaviour. The information is communication

with the content of the message and the behaviour refers to how the message should be

interpreted. Together the message and behaviour create a relationship between

communicating parts. The better relationship between people the more carefully they

consider the content in the message. Weak relationships are instead characterized by

constant struggle where the content of the message become less and less important.

(Watzlawick et al., 2007)

3.4 Communication across subunits

Cooperation is also tested in an organization when it comes to collaboration across activity

networks. Activity networks are made up by different units within an organization where

members of the network share work priorities and help each other in their activities. Within

activity networks there are always a level of differentiation between individuals no matter

of the size of the network. This can easily cause segmentation in a complex organization

but does not necessarily need to be so. Collaboration within activity networks can raise

issues concerning priority, relative authority, operational methods and influence. (Blackler

et al. 2003) This means that horizontal integration across expert networks can be difficult to

achieve. For example shared understandings or shared infrastructure of units that build

collaboration can sometimes act as a barrier towards other units and close collaboration.

(Dougherty, 1992) Weak ties between subunits make the sharing of knowledge more

inefficient when the exchanged knowledge is complex. Weak ties can also be beneficial in

the sense that employees search for useful information in other units and can therefore

speed up a project if the exchange of knowledge is not complex. If search and exchange of

information take a long time it’s likely that the knowledge sharing affect the performance in

the organization. Large organizations with several units are complex and make the search

process for knowledge difficult. Even if it takes time it’s important for employees to spend

time with employees from other units in order to build relationships which will help the

exchange of complex knowledge. (Hansen, 1999)

3.5 Communication channels

An important issue to make horizontal internal communication effective in project teams is

to have knowledge about how to exchange information (Abdullah et al., 2012). This

demands everyone in the organization to have knowledge about available communication

channels and to use the right communication channel to the right the message. (Smith et al.,

2008; Welch et al., 2007)

Today many organizations have reduced the use of printed communication and replaced it

with computer-mediated communication (CMC). CMC is a communication channel that

has emerged through technology development of computers in the end of the 20th century,

and has become very useful and practical in organizations. CMC does not only provide

easy accessible information but also platforms where several other communications

channels can be used. The most common communication channels with computers are e-

mail, video conference and intranet. E-mail is very common and thoroughly used within

organizations. It is easy to use, quick and can reach several recipients at the same time very

15

fast. (Smith et al., 2008) Compared with face-to-face recipients get time to carefully

consider their answer without being caught unaware (Lloyd et al., 2003).

Another communication channel that has become very useful in large organizations is video

conferences. Video conferences are used to keep networks in touch with each other within

an organization and often works as a supplement to face-to face communication. (Smith et

al., 2008) When it comes to dispersed workforces video conference is a useful substitute

(Smith et al., 2008) and saves money and time (Miller, 2009). Due to the time lapse it can

be hard to hear who is talking and when (Smith et al., 2008).

Intranet is the third most used communication channel within CMC according to Smith et

al. (2008). Intranet can provide vast opportunities depending on it’s construction. For

example, it can provide news, information, employee service and much more. Some

intranets are also connected with a phone system where employees can phone each other

without a physical phone. (Miller, 2009) One important feature with intranets is that the

storage of information is endless (Smith et al., 2008). This makes it possible to post

documents, that others can pick up and use when needed. Intranet is a collaborative tool

that easily can appear within virtual teams that only communicate through technology.

(Miller, 2009)

It’s important to remember that there is no right communication channel and it all depends

on the environment, message and receiver (Lloyd et al., 2003). To succeed and send

appropriate messages that are useful and in right format can benefit the internal

communication. If employees feel that inappropriate messages are conducted it can

accidentally damage internal relationships. (Welch, 2012) Therefore the language in the

message is also something to be considered. Many organizations or parts of organizations

often have their own in house language and can be hard for others, who are excluded from

the community, to understand. The use of language should therefore be very thoughtful

which can make a huge difference in the communication. (Smith et al., 2008)

3.6 How the theory is used in the study

The theories above have been chosen because they could help to describe how horizontal

internal communication affects CSR commitments. From these theories the aim have been

reformulated and defined into three sub questions that first are going to be answered and

then will give answer to the aim. The theories are applied as follows.

Corporate communication

Corporate communication is essential for horizontal internal communication to work well

(Borca et al., 2014). Without corporate communication it’s likely that horizontal internal

communication get inefficient (Welch et al., 2007). This theory is relevant because it

explains why it’s important for employees to be united within organizations that have

commitments. This study has looked at how employees interpret corporate communication

from higher levels of the hierarchy in the organization in order to se how united the staff is

and how their interpretation affects the horizontal internal communication.

Cooperation and communication across subunits

Cooperation help organizations to achieve their commitments in an efficient way (Tjosvold

et al., 2003). The investigated organization is divided into several units that work together

in different team activities. Cooperation within these networks can be hard to achieve since

they involve levels of differentiations between individuals which can cause segmentations

(Blackler et al. 2003). Through well working cooperation among others accurate

communication and mutual support can be received (West et al., 2003). This study has

16

looked at factors within the organizations horizontal internal communication that both

facilitate and aggravate cooperation. The theory communication across units will help to

understand why cooperations can be difficult in complex organizations with several units

and many employees.

Communication channels

Knowledge about how to exchange information through communication channels are

important for an effective horizontal internal communication (Abdullah et al. 2012).

Communication channels need to be adapted to the message, receiver and environment in

order for information to be delivered successfully (Welch, 2012). This theory is applied in

order to explain the complexity of the horizontal internal communication work within the

organization. The study has looked at how employees use and exchange information

through different communication channels.

17

4 Method

4.1 Qualitative research approach

This study is conducted from a real life situation in a specific organization. A phenomenon

about internal communication has been identified and the purpose of this study is to seek

understanding of how the horizontal internal communication works in this organization. To

get a good understanding of the internal communication that is a dynamic and flexible

social process, it is good to have a research approach that is not limited for any kinds of

data that can be collected. Therefore this study is conducted with a qualitative research

approach. According to Silverman (2015), qualitative research approach is about verbal

interpretations of real life situations. Within qualitative research a phenomenon is described

in a specific context where processes or meanings are interpreted. Qualitative research

understanding of a specific case is seeked. (Silverman, 2015)

With a qualitative research approach it is possible to investigate and understand all aspects

of internal communication since the approach is not limited to variables that can restrict

explanation of a whole context. A quantitative research approach would not be able to get

the necessary information in order to analyse the whole context of internal communication.

Quantitative research is often used when investigating causality between many variables

that can be measured (Cresswell, 2014). These kinds of researches often formulate theories

that try to understand why something varies (Silverman, 2015).

4.2 Semi-structured interviews

In this study semi-structured interviews are chosen as method in order to gain as detailed

information as possible about horizontal internal communication. Semi-structured

interviews give the interviewer a more broad discussion with the interviewees compared

with for example a questionnaire according to Flowerdew et al. (2005). This means that this

kind of interview structure will give the flexibility for further questions during the

interview. To use interviews as a method do not provide directly facts but rather a

representation of a person’s experiences (Silverman, 2015). This will affect the collected

data of this study and the data and result will be weaker rather if situations about horizontal

internal communication were interpreted directly without any part between the interviewer

and the experienced situations. At the same time the purpose with the interviews is to get

the interviewees to speak about their experiences of the horizontal internal communication

in the organization. Data and information conducted in interviews are something that the

interviewer together with the interviewee conducts in a research (Alvesson, 2011). This

perspective will also be adapted in this study. At the same time the interviewer of this study

therefore will influence the collected data. How the questions were formulated and how the

interviewer act as a person has affected the interviewee and the data. Another risk with

18

lower structured interviews, as semi-structured, is that the interviewees can get into the

wrong unproductive directions which can be time consuming and make it hard to structure

the empirical result (Alvesson, 2011).

If structured interviews were used the questions would be set with purpose to keep

consistency during the interview (Silverman, 2015) which often is used in quantitative

methods (Halvorsen, 1992). With structured interview questions there would be less

flexibility for further understanding of the horizontal internal communication and its

context which could be negative for the whole study in this case because important data

will be lost.

The interviews of this study follow a structure with a beginning, middle and end. The

interview guide (see appendix 1) is constructed with a neutral beginning of a few

background questions followed by the middle section that invite to conversation about the

organizations internal communication. The interview is ended by asking if the interviewee

want to add something. According to Alvesson (2011) semi-structured interviews can be

divided into a beginning, middle and end. The beginning is where the interviewer try to

establish a collaborative relation and the interviewees is warmed up. This is usually done

by asking neutral questions as background etcetera. A beginning with neutral questions

helps to contribute to a more explorative middle part. The middle part is best started with a

well delimit theme and when the interviewer is motivated ask more in depth or follow-up

questions. The typical end of an interview is to ask if the interviewee want to add

something. (Alvesson, 2011)

The interviews in this study have been structured so the interviewees can express their

experiences through storytelling and not answers. This means that a conversation was

conducted where the interviewee and interviewer together talked about the interviewee’s

experiences of the organizations horizontal internal communication. According to Alvesson

(2011) it’s often insufficient in qualitative research to ask clear and well structured

questions that easily can be understood with context-free meaning when the purpose is to

explore complex and often personal matters. Therefore only one start question was

conducted in order to begin the conversation followed by questions adapted to the interview

situation in order to get as detailed information as possible. The start question is also

formulated as an invitation for the interviewee to talk about a specific work case in order to

give more details and in depth information about the organizations horizontal internal

communication. In this way also space is given to the interviewees so they can talk about

what they think is important of horizontal internal communication. This interview

technique that is open and flexible follows by that no interview will be identical but rather

adapted to the context of the situation and aspects brought up.

According to Silverman (2015) it’s important to consider how to establish understanding

with the respondents during interviews. During the interviews the language in the question

formulation has been adapted after how the interviewer thinks the interviewees will receive

the questions. Furthermore, according to Alvesson (2011), there is no set of specific words

that can explain an experience and objective reality can never be expressed through

language. When words are used there are millions of words that can be used for explanation

of an experience which highlight a problem with representation. During the autumn 2015 I

the interviewer and researcher of this study did an internship at this organization. During

that period I got familiar with parts of the culture and use of language within the

organization. This can be an advantage since the language and representation of

experiences can be difficult.

19

4.3 Sample

The sample in this study is conducted in order to get a good qualified data, which means

that interviewees from different parts of the organization are chosen so different

perspectives of the horizontal internal communication can be covered. According to

Flowerdew et al. (2005) sample in qualitative research is selected to be illustrative along

with the aim in the research. Therefore the interviewees are often chosen with a

theoretically motivated decision (Flowerdew et al., 2005). It is important to choose

interviewees in order to get both variation and depth so the whole social category that is

aimed to address can be covered (Alvesson, 2011). This also means that the researcher need

to think critically about the parameters of the population that is of interest when choosing

the sample (Silverman, 2015). To use a snowball effect to recruit interviewees to this study

would not be the best option since it is important that different parts of the organization

participate in order to get a good understanding of the whole context of the horizontal

internal communication. Therefore all interviewees are chosen selectively and asked via

mail if they want to participate in this study. To find the right persons to interview an

employee at the organization has helped out.

Furthermore, because the sample is not randomly picked from a register with employees in

the organization it is not possible to make statistic generalizations of the findings in this

study. To make statistic generalizations is more important in quantitative researches where

the purpose often is to say that the findings are not unique for this people, according to

Bryman (2012). This means that the same kind of research can be conducted with another

sample and get the same result (Bryman, 2012). This study could be done in another

organization but since internal communication is a social complex process dependent on a

specific context in form of people that create the communication and surrounding

environment the findings would not be the same.

4.4 Interview execution

The interviews in this study have been accomplished at the interviewee’s work place in a

smaller room in a calm environment, in order to contribute to a more relaxed conversation

where the interviewees can speak openly (Flowerdew et al., 2005; Alvesson, 2011). All

interviews have been accomplished face to face and in Swedish since all of the interviewees

have Swedish as their mother tongue. The interviews have also been recorded on the

approval of the interviewees in order for the interviewer to be able to engage in the

conversation and to capture accurate details (Flowerdew et al., 2005). Duration of the

interviews has been from 30 minutes to one hour.

4.5 Data treatment and analysis

This study has conducted 12 interviews in order to have time for good transcription and

analyse. All collected data from the interviews are transcribed and concentrated as soon as

possible after each interview in order not to miss any details. If something is blurry on the

recording the chance is much bigger that the interviewer will remember the situation and

that all data can be used. To use and transcribe collected data from interviews can be time

consuming (Halvorsen, 1992). This implies that the number of interviews that can be

carried out needs to be restricted. A compromise to this can be only to transcribe the most

significant parts of the interviews and summarize the content of what’s been said. At the

same time the researcher can miss interesting parts by being guided to much from earlier

interviews. (Alvesson, 2011) Parts of the data from the interviews are not relevant for this

study and therefore not presented in the results and discussion.

20

Each transcript have been analysed after the main themes in the interview guide, which is

based on the theory chapter, in order to identify similarities and differences in the

horizontal internal communication in the organization. After the result of the interview

material is analysed together with the theories about internal communication in order to get

a more nuanced picture about the organizations horizontal internal communication.

According to Alvesson (2011) categorization and interpretation of the interview material is

vital. Through categorizing and sortation the researcher will get an overview of the material

that can be helpful for finding patterns and produce results. At the same time it is necessary

to carefully and critically assess the material in order not to take for granted blocks of

knowledge production about social reality. Interviews may not necessarily reflect the

feelings of a person’s, experience or thinking. (Alvesson, 2011) During the study the

organization has changed their CSR policy, but has not affected this study.

21

5 Results and discussion

The investigated organization is build on several subsidiary companies (further on called

units) were each subsidiary is expert in a specific profession. The organization works in

teams which means that people from different subsidiaries with different expertise are put

together into a team to deliver consulting services. The persons interviewed in this study

come from different subsidiaries and work or have worked in the same team activity with

some of the other interviewees. Each team activity the persons have been interviewed about

involves around hundred employees or more from the organization. This means that the

interviewees only work with a part of these projects and the result will not cover all

horizontal internal communication in the projects.

5.1 Communication between units

In almost every team activity within the organization there is more than one unit involved.

All interviewees have been interviewed about a team activity where they are or have been

working with peers in several other units. Since several units moved together to one

location the relation between the employees in different units have improved and have

resulted in better cooperation according to some interviewees. One interviewee expressed

“Since we moved here to the same location we are more like one organization, and the

more time we spend together it gets easier to cooperate”. Because of this the interviewees

have created a larger circle of contact within the organization. Therefore the employees also

have more knowledge about others competence in the organization, especially in the same

office. Despite, it’s hard to know what other units are doing. The internal horizontal

communication between the units is most of the time good according to some interviewees.

However, according to another interviewee there is optimism among employees in many

team activities that a number of people from different units should cooperate perfectly. This

person says “in many team activities employees are optimistic about, that 15 persons are

put together and they should solve this”. Employees from different units want to fulfill

different goals within a team activity depending on the work they are doing. Therefore it

can be challenging to meet all goals within a team activity.

According to Leung et al. (2003) it’s not easy to manage cooperation when employees are

put together across disciplinary boundaries. Cooperation has improved according to the

interviewees, but there are still tensions between employees that could be reduced. In

groups of people working together in organizations there is a variation of perspectives on

how to understand the reality, therefore it should be expected that there are some

communication problems (Johansson, 2003). Several units in the organization have moved

to the same location and will help the employees to create and strengthen their relationships

with other peers. Even if it takes time it’s important for employees to spend time with each

other even from other units in order to build relationships to help the exchange of complex

22

knowledge (Hansen, 1999). The content of messages become more considered and

friendlier when there are good relations between the employees (Watzlawick et al., 2007).

During the interviews it was brought up that there is a feeling of a culture among the

employees where it is ok to say that they do not understand something. This interviewee

says “it’s definitely a culture where it’s ok to say that you don’t understand”. At the same

time there is another interviewee that experienced resistance from employees in other units

when asking questions in order to understand, especially when they don’t have any relation

to one another. This person expresses “some are very helpful … and some are very

condescending therefore it can be nervous when contacting someone I never spoken with

before”. Since it is an uncertainty about what kind of person you will meet some employees

don’t understand the information rather than facing an awkward situation where they are

seen as less valuable. Cooperation and horizontal integration across expert networks can be

difficult to achieve since shared understanding or infrastructure within a unit can build

barriers towards other units (Dougherty, 1992). In some situations teams with employees

seem to work better together. Situations where cooperation not work so well can be because

of weak or no relationships are established between the employees. Weak bonds between

units can make sharing of knowledge inefficient according to Hansen (1999). This could

explain why employees feel resistance from other units.

Within activity networks there are always levels of differentiation, no matter of the size,

which easily can cause segmentation (Blackler et al. 2003). Several interviewees express

that there are segmentation and internal competition between the units. Because of

segmentation employees have to work harder to get the information they need and

sometimes they choose not to bring up a subject when they know it’s going to be resisted.

Another interviewee feels it’s hard to access information when other units are main

responsible for the team activity. Internal competition between units shows when there’s

not a clear line of what each unit should work with in an activity and some of them want to

do the same thing.

Opposite of cooperation is competition. When competition develops people tend to keep

information and ideas for them selves just to win the competition which can stop other

people from effective actions. (Tjosvold et al., 2003) Both segmentation and competition

between the units tending employees not to share information. This restricts the

communication and can result in hostility among employees (Tjosvold et al., 2003),

although there is no sign of hostility yet among the employees. Segmentation can also be

seen within the organization when it comes to environmental aspects.

5.2 Employee’s interpretation of corporate communication

Interviewees that both think cooperation between units are good and interviewees that think

it’s less good agree on that environmental aspects is looked at in very different ways

between the units. Depending on which unit the employees work in the perception is

different of how environmental aspects should be treated in team activities. A few

interviewees think there is common thinking among the employees and one interviewee

feels that the organization try to inspire environmental interest among the employees.

However, most of the interviewees express that there is not much common thinking or

reflection of how to deal with environmental aspects cooperatively. There is no clear

request from the organization about how the employees should work with environmental

issues and sustainability. According to most of the interviewees, the information that the

employees take part of is quite general. An interviewee says “the information is so general

which makes it difficult to work in the same direction, the interpretation is very different”.

23

Most interviewees therefore feel that a lot of responsibility is on the employees themselves

to find a way to embrace environmental aspects in team activities.

Since the meaning of environment is different between the units it shows that the staff do

not have a united understanding of environment. The employee’s way of thinking and

acting affect the organizations commitments (Borca et al., 2014). According to Welch et al.

(2007) it’s essential to have a united understanding of environment among the employees in

order for the horizontal internal communication to not become inefficient. It occurs in the

organization that there is unclear communication about what work each unit should do. One

interviewee expresses “sometimes there can be an unclear line about which unit or units

that should work with what, two units may want to do the same thing therefore it can be

hard to decide which unit that should do the task”. It happens that unclear communication

result in double work which contributes to that one of the units has to reproduce their work

and adapt to the other. In other situations it happens that team members not foreworn that

they can’t finish their work in time which create tensions. When tensions emerge team

members from time to time have to work harder to get information. This is two examples of

when inefficient horizontal internal communication occurs between the units.

A more united understanding of environment could be achieved through corporate

communication which help employee’s to attain the commitments of the organization

(Abdullah et al. 2012). Several interviewees think that the environment is an important part

that should be considered more from every employee in all team activities, but also that

environmental aspects can be involved more in all team activities. This shows that there is

willingness within the organization to cooperate about environmental aspects but the

corporate communication that can unite the employees understanding are to scarce.

According to one interviewee it is stated in the organization that it’s necessary to work with

the environment what this person feels is understood among other employees. Some other

interviewees experience there are common thinking about the environment. This could

mean that between some units there is a common and united understanding of environment.

But in order to analyse how and where that understanding exists further data about each

units is required.

5.3 Priority of environmental aspects

Environmental aspects are often subordinated other objects in team activities. Aspects as

infrastructure, money or the functionality of the solution, as where the railway should go,

often have higher priority than environmental aspects. Two of the interviewees states “time

and money goes first, then we have to consider the environmental aspects as well” and “it’s

rare that the environment get to restrict the functionality”. Interviewees have experienced

that it’s sometimes difficult to have influence in other subjects. In some cases there is not

even possible to discuss environmental aspects because decision of for example the

functionality of a railway is already made and not negotiable. This means that other

subjects need to accept the decision and work from the situation as good as possible, even if

it means tremendous effects on the environment. In these situations there are often limited

space to present an environmental viewpoint. Despite, the interviewees agree that all kinds

of environmental issues most of the time get space for discussion in every team activity. At

the same time interviewees experience that some employees are more open for

environmental discussions than others and that environmental aspects meet resistance from

some employees. To which extent environmental aspects are discussed in a team activity

also depend on the activity itself and how much environmental aspects are affected. When

there are environmental aspects that need to be considered in a team activity from the

beginning because of regulations they are more prioritized. Some team activities, mainly

24

the larger ones, have a structure from the beginning which includes environmental aspects.

When the environment is included from the beginning it’s easier for environmental aspects

to influence on other subjects because decisions are not made yet. There is also an

experience among the interviewees that the larger a team activity is, with more units

involved, the harder it gets for environmental aspects to be prioritized. They also

experience that environmental aspects often are forgotten.

Employees from different units lack united understanding of environment seems to affect

the horizontal internal communication of how environmental aspects are prioritized within

team activities. Different perspectives on environment have resulted in different opinions

about how it should be included in team activities and could therefore be a reason of why

environmental aspects not always are discussed or are discussed very limited.

Environmental aspects can be forgotten because there are no clear corporate

communication that guides the employees and therefore it is only prioritized when needed

by some employees. In order to know how to work, and in which direction, employees need

guidelines (Borca et al., 2014). There is a clear separation between the employees in what

direction they should work with environment. In order to get a united staff and well

working horizontal internal communication cooperation is an important aspect (Tjosvold et

al., 2003).

The interviewees experience several indications that cooperation not is optimal. These

indicatons are:

A difficulty for environmental aspects to influence other subjects.

Sometimes its even unpossible to discuss environmental aspects.

Personal resistance from other employees concerning environmental aspects.

According to Blackler et al., (2003) collaboration within activity networks can raise issues

concerning priority and influence. Therefore horizontal integration across expert networks

can be difficult to achieve (Dougherty, 1992). The horizontal integration between units in

team activities can be weak since there are issues concerning priority and influence when it

comes to environmental aspects. To achieve good cooperation in a team all involved have

to choose to work cooperatively with each other (Tjosvold et al., 2003). Here it gets clear

that some employees choose not to cooperate from time to time. The employees need to

find ways to assist each other between the units and prevent resistance in order to gain great

cooperation within the organization as whole (Tjosvold et al., 2003).

5.4 Cooperation

Cooperation involves supportive, helpful and integrative actions which will lead to strong

interpersonal relationships and to help teams to succeed a task (Tjosvold 2003). The

employees assist and support to each other with information can be seen through

communication of different channels that are available in the organization. Through the

communication channels, e-mail and Lync, employees easily can reach other peers when

needed especially when working in different locations. E-mail is a fast way to communicate

and can reach several other peers at the same time. It’s often used when peers want to

inform others about new information or where it can be found. It's not possible to save

messages via e-mail which, according to a few interviewees, are restricting and complicate

cooperation of information exchange that occur by e-mail. Employees that have met or

communicated at earlier occasions answer each others e-mail to a larger extent. The other

communication channel Lync is web-based communication where meetings, phone calls

and chatting can take place. The phone over Lync is often used when the interviewees need

information urgent. In Lync the employees can mark their status so others can see if the

person is available, in a meeting or occupied. Half of the interviewees experience huge

25

advantage of sharing computer screen via Lync. This helps the understanding of messages.

They can also hand over the steering of the computer to someone else to show how

something is done. One interviewee sees an advantage with chatting on Lync. This person

says “I like to use the chat because I can see if the person is available and if so I can write

a message”.

More than half of the interviewees also report that they ask the nearest peers around them

when they need information. Many of these interviewees think that it is an advantage to

have several disciplines within the organization collected at the same office, and that the

most effective way of communicating is to sit next to each other. What communication

channels the interviewees prefer to use often depend on the situation. When addressing

people they have spoken with before several of the interviewees think of what kind of

situation it is and the information they are going to exchange and adapt communication

channel after that. The thought of who or whom that is addressed are often present at the

interviewees but subconscious, it goes automatically.

It’s clear that team members help and support each other to find the right information.

Employees take help from each other to contribute to strong interrelationships which are

important for cooperation in the organization (Tjosvold et al., 2003). By e-mail the

employees get time to carefully consider their answer without being caught unaware (Lloyd

et al., 2003). The communication channel Lync keeps networks within the organization in

touch (Smith et al., 2008) and make the communication to flow with no interruptions, since

they often have team members in different locations. When sharing screens employees can

show what they talk about. This can be seen as a supplement to verbal communication

(Smith et al., 2008) that help interpretation of others messages. In this way the employees

understanding of each other will be better.

It’s important to remember that there is no right communication channel and all depends on

the environment, the message and the receiver (Lloyd et al., 2003). The interviewees try to

adapt the communication from the situation most of the time. When they do this it will

benefit the internal communication (Welch, 2012). Other benefits the organization receives

from this cooperation among the employees are accurate communication, mutual support

and assistance (West et al., 2003). However, it is not always easy to know which peer that

has which information. Many of the interviewees think that the horizontal internal

communication between units could be better if more relationships were established among

the employees.

5.4.1 Relationships

The interviewees experience that virtual communication gets better when they have

established good relations with other peers. Two interviewees stated “it’s always easier to

have met before especially when writing e-mail” and “I think it’s crucial to establish good

contacts in the beginning and aim for some physical meetings so we know each other”.

This helps the communication to be better and easier further on in a team activity. The more

the employees know each other the easier it becomes to take contact and ask questions.

This gets even more important when some units only take part in an activity for a short

time. It happens all the time that team member’s work with each other without having met

before. Some team activities have physical start meetings while others do not. A few

interviewees tell that they always make sure that they have physical meetings when they

start in a team activity. One interviewee state “when I started in this team activity I had

physical meetings with some of the peers because we felt it was good to meet in the

beginning”. Today it’s often in the end of activities that employees start to create

relationships and the communication begin to run smoothly between the team members.

People also realize that they need help from each other in order to reach an excellent result

of the activity. If employees can’t meet physically they prefer to at least have a picture of

26

people they communicate with. The best way is to talk physically to get a picture of a

person. To have a picture of another person makes the communication easier especially at

meetings over Lync. The knowledge of how to address someone increases if the people

have met before and started to build a relationship.

According to Tjosvold et al. (2003) relationships will help the cooperation and teams to

succeed their task. The employees seem to have a willingness to build relationships because

they experience the internal horizontal communication to be much better then. Even if it

takes time it’s important for employees to spend time with employees in other units in order

to build relationships which will help the exchange of complex knowledge (Hansen, 1999).

When team activities start to run smoothly in the end of an activity it shows that

relationship building is not sufficient among the employees. To have knowledge of other

peers and organizational roles will lead to improved internal communication (Lloyd et al.,

2003). It also means that in situations today where employees don’t have relationships the

communication is experienced as much harder. Face-to-face communication is useful when

new work teams are created so they all can get to know each other (Miller, 2009). This is

clearly expressed by the interviewees.

In the end of team activities it also shows that employees start to get interested in each

other. This is an indicator that cooperation takes place because employees start to

encourage each others actions to be effective (Tjosvold et al., 2003). When employees

cooperate they also understand that their goals are related with others and that their own

knowledge will help others to succeed. It is when employees exchange their abilities and

discuss their differences cooperatively they all can benefit by working together. (Tjosvold

et al., 2003) However, when it comes to information in team folders and meetings it seems

harder for the employees to cooperate.

5.4.2 Information system Portalen

The organization has a web-based information system called Portalen. In this system each

team activity has its own folder (further on called team folder) where all information in the

team is gathered. All employees in a team should have access to the team folder where they

can search for and upload information. But it occurs all the time that employees don’t have

access to the team folder. The access can during a team activity change for members and

results in the folder they reached two days ago now are blocked. When the access to folders

is poor temporary folders can be created. This creates extra e-mail with links where these

can be found. It creates uncertainty about which document is the latest version, and the risk

that something gets wrong is quite big.

Most part of the interviewees thinks it’s difficult to find information in the team folder

because of the amount and missing structure of folders. One interviewee expressed “It’s

incomprehensible” another “It’s difficult to get a good structure of the folders there can be

so many documents and subfolders”. Some interviewees think that there is a clear structure

of the folders, but documents are not always uploaded or found where they are said to be. A

few interviewees experience that there’s some structure of how to name folders but not

enough. One interviewee thinks that the team folder works well and says “the team folder

is on the server and there I have my own subfolder with my own stuff, and then there is

basic data and maybe in other places but what I need is in my subfolder. Then there is some

common folder where finished reports are placed … and this is here and that is there. It’s

clear.”. However, most often the interviewees don’t know which folders to look into or

where to find information. The overall experience is that team folders do not have any or a

very poor structure of the folders, which make the whole system very confusing.

There is scarce information about how to structure, name or use folders in the team folder

according to the interviewees. Employees want to start working as soon as possible which

27

lead to that everyone starts to name document and folders after what they think is best. This

gets confusing for other team members that need to ask other peers in order to find

information which is time consuming. Interviewees experience that some team members

from different units only think of their unit in the team and don’t care about the others who

need the information. A side affect of the naming is that employees don’t know which

version they should work with. When employees don’t know which version is the latest

they often do double work.

Employees who don’t have access to the team folder and the naming of both folders and

documents are confusing and can be seen as unsupportive actions according to Tjosvold et

al. (2003) and that the employees don’t want to cooperate. This will not gain the team

activity to succeed. Large organizations with several units are complex and therefore make

the search process for information difficult (Hansen, 1999). Because of the confusing

naming it shows that the search process of information are difficult and that employees

need to ask other peers. According to Watzlawick et al. (2007) meta-communication

emerge when employees try to interpret the names on folders but don’t understand and try

to solve the situation by speaking to other peers about the problem. Since many team

activities often include many members it can be hard to have good relationship with

everyone. Non relationships between employees can result in that team members don’t care

about the content in the message when they conduct folder names. Often there is some

knowledge among the employees about what kind of competence there is in the same office

which makes the search of information easier. To have knowledge about employee’s roles,

which they have to some extent in this organization is, according to Lloyd et al. (2003),

important for the cooperation and help the internal communication to be more efficient. If

search and exchange of information take a long time it’s likely that the knowledge sharing

affect the performance in the organization (Hansen, 1999).

5.4.3 Meetings

When meetings take place there are often one or a few team members participating over

Lync and the others are in a conference room. There is usually one source or the computer

that absorb sounds from the conference room which results in a bad speaker sound for those

on Lync. Members on Lync often need to complain that they can’t hear, and sometimes

nothing is done about it. One interviewee expresses “you have to comment that we don’t

hear anything and sometimes even when we do so nothing gets better”. Several

interviewees also experience that information gets lost in these situations because of the bad

sound and not reach all meeting members. Some interviewees feel unmotivated and that it’s

pointless to stay in meetings in these situations. It also happens that the people in the

conference room drop the context of the meeting and discuss other things. According to

interviewees it’s also difficult to see when someone wants to speak. This makes it difficult

to participate on Lync and leads to that people on Lync feel more like observing instead of

participating in the meeting.

To solve these situations a few interviewees said they prefer to ask questions, if possible,

right away at the meeting but there is not always an opportunity to do that. Many other

interviewees try to get needed information after the meeting often by phoning or e-mailing

a colleague they know has the information. One of the interviewees prefers to read

protocols from meetings if any have been written. This person state “if I can’t hear what’s

been said in the meeting I use to think, I can read the protocol later”. The protocol may not

refer to all details discussed and the context is often lost. To get information after a meeting

also has the side effect that part of the information is likely not to reach the person who

needs it. This creates frustration among the employees and the feeling of pointless

meetings. Some of the interviewees think that it is up to the leader of the meeting to make

sure that everyone who needs to take part of the information can do it. Some interviewees

also feel that invitations to meetings have poor information about why there is a meeting

28

and what kind of result the meeting will contribute to. Because of this meetings often start

to conclude what everyone is doing there and is experienced as irritating.

Not all members in a meeting can take part of the information, protocols not written and

that invitations to meetings have poor information can also be seen as non supportive or

unhelpful actions. This will not help the team activity to reach their goal and is affecting the

cooperation (Tjosvold et al., 2003). Since supportive actions help to build interpersonal

relationships these actions will probably not help because the employees get irritated on

each others unhelpful actions. Employees need to take responsibility for their behaviour

and actions and make sure that ethical corporate behaviour is conducted in the every day

work (Collier et al., 2007).

According to many of the interviewees meetings over Lync are working best when all of

the meeting members are sitting by them selves. The meetings are most of the time well

structured and therefore also effective, in comparison with physical meetings that can float

away. One reason to this could be that people can’t sit small talking with each other over

Lync, because if they do no one can’t hear anything.

29

6 Conclusions

The organizations CSR commitments are affected by the horizontal internal

communication. The aim of this study is to describe how environmental CSR commitments

are affected by the horizontal internal communication within an organization. The most

significant conclustions are as follows:

This study shows that the employees in this organization define environmental aspects in

different and sometimes contradicting terms. Though cooperation between employees have

become much better since several units moved to one location there are still differentiations

that cause segmentation in the organization. This have affected the horizontal internal

communication and resulted in situations where inefficient and restricted communication

occurs between units and employees. Because of this employees have a more difficult time

to get the information they need.

The employees are discordant about environmental aspects and this affects the priority of

environmental aspects in team activities. Different perspectives on environment have

resulted in separate opinions and a division among the employees about how it should be

included in team activities. Because there is resistance among the employees several of the

interviewees rather avoid situations where they know they will meet resistance from other

employees. The overall experience among the interviewees is that environmental aspects

are not included as much as it could be in team activities. A more common understanding

of environmental aspects among the employees could be achieved through clear corporate

communication. At the same time the employees need to find ways to assist each other and

prevent resistance of environmental aspect in order to gain good cooperation within the

organization.

Segmentation and resistance between employees also make the horizontal integration

across units weak and aggravate the cooperation in the organization. Aggravation of

cooperation is evident in team folders because of confusing names on documents and

structure of folders which makes it difficult for employees to reach information. It is also

evident with information in and around meetings. Because employees don’t get proper

information before meetings or can’t, from time to time, take part of information in and

after meetings aggravate the cooperation. It shows that some employees do not choose to

work cooperatively which is essential for a well working horizontal internal

communication. However, the employees are keen to help each other to find information in

all situations which facilitates cooperation. To make the cooperation better the interviewees

all agree on that more and stronger relationships need to be established among the

employees. Today employees often communicate without having any relationships which

aggravate the cooperation. To build stronger relationships would facilitate both cooperation

and the horizontal internal communication in the organization.

30

References

Printed

Abdullah, Z. and Antonay, C. A. (2012). Perception of Employees on Internal

Communication of a Leading Five Star Hotel in Malaysia. Asian Social

Science Volume 8(2):17-26.

Abrahamsson, B. and Andersen, J, A. (2005). Organisation – att beskriva och förstå

organisationer. 4th ed. Slovenien: Korotan Ljubljana.

Altinöz, M. (2008). An overall approach to the communication of organizations in

conventional and virtual offices. International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational,

Economic, Business and Industrial Engineering Volume 2(5):627-633.

Alvesson, M. (2011). Interpreting Interviews. Croydon: CPI Group Ltd.

Arvidsson, S. (2010). Communication of corporate Social Responsibility: A study of the

views of management teams in large companies. Journal of Business Ethics Volume

96:339-354.

Bernelind, A. and Widén, E. (2015). En fungerade intern kommunikation kan leda till

engagemang: en fallstudie av den interna kommunikationen på Kinnarps Interior Uppsala.

Uppsala: Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet. (Examensarbete inom ekonomi och

kandidatprogrammet).

Blackler, F., Crump, N., and McDonald, S. (2003). Organizing processes in complex

activity networks. In: D. Nicolini, S. Gherardi, D. Yanow, ed., Knowing in organizations: A

practice-based approach, 1st ed. New York: M.E. Sharpe, Inc., pp. 126-150.

Borca, C. and Baesu, V. (2014). A Possible Managerial Approach for Internal

Organizational Communication Characterization. Social and Behavioural Sciences Volume

124:496-503.

Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Carroll, A, B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: evolution of a definitional construct.

Business and society Volume 38(3):268-295.

Collier, J. and Esteban, R. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and employee

commitment. Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 16(1):19-33.

Cresswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed methods

Approaches. 4th international student ed. London: SAGE Publications.

Cunningham, W, P. and Cunningham, M. (2010). Environmental science, a global concern.

11th ed. New York: MacGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

31

Dicken, P. (2011). Global shift, mapping the changing contours of the world economy. 6th

ed. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Dougherty, D. (1992). Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in firms.

Organization science Volume 3(2):179-202.

Flowerdew, R. and Martin, D. (2005). Methods in human geography: a guide for students

doing a research project. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.

Goldhaber, G, M. (1989). Organizational communication. 5th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill

Higher Education.

Halvorsen, K. (1992). Samhällsvetenskaplig metod. Lund: Studentlitteratur AB.

Hansen, M, T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: the role of weak ties in sharing

knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative science quarterly Volume 44:82-

111.

Idowu, S,O., Capaldi, N., Zu, L. and Das Gupta, A. (2013). Encyclopedia of Corporate

Social Responsibility. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Ince, M. and Gül, H. (2011). The Role of the Organizational Communication on

Employees’ Perception of Justice: A Sample of Public Institution from Turkey. European

Journal of Social Sciences Volume 21(1):106-124.

Johansson, C. (2003). Visioner och verkligheter. Stockholm: Elanders Gotab.

Joshi, A. and Jackson, S, E. (2003). Managing workforce diversity to enhance cooperation

in organisations. In: M. West, D. Tjosvold, K. G. Smith, ed., International handbook of

organizational teamwork and cooperative working, 1st ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons

Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate., pp. 277-296.

Kolja, P. (2010). Corporate social responsibility (CSR): an international marketing

approach. Hamburg: Diplomica Verlag.

Lee, E, M., Park, S-Y. and Lee, H, J. (2013). Employee perception of CSR activities: Its

antecedents and consequences. Journal of Business Research Volume 66:1716-1724.

Leung, K., Lu, L. and Liang, X. (2003). When east and west meet: effective teamwork

across cultures. In: M. West, D. Tjosvold, K. G. Smith, ed., International handbook of

organizational teamwork and cooperative working, 1st ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons

Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate., pp. 551-572.

Lloyd, H. and Varey, R, J. (2003). Factors affecting internal communication in a strategic

alliance project. Corporate communications: An international journal Volume 8(3):197-

207.

Miller, P. (2009). How intranets and related technologies are redefining internal

communication. In: M. Wright, ed., Gower handbook of internal communication, 2nd ed.

Cornwall: MPG Books Ltd., pp. 189-198.

Silverman, D. (2015). Interpreting Qualitative Data. 5th ed. London: SAGE Publications.

Smith, L. and Mounter, P. (2008). Effective internal communication. 2nd ed. London: Kogan

Page Limited.

Tjosvold, D., West, M. A. and Smith, K.G. (2003). Teamwork and cooperation:

Fundamentals of organizational effectiveness. In: M. West, D. Tjosvold, K. G. Smith, ed.,

International handbook of organizational teamwork and cooperative working, 1st ed.

Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate., pp. 3-8.

32

Tjosvold, D. (1998). Employee Involvement in Support of Corporate Values in

Successful Organizations: Groups, Cooperative Interaction, and Influence. International

Journal of Value-Based Management Volume 11:35-46.

Walker, S. (2009). Measurment. In: M. Wright, ed., Gower handbook of international

communication, 2nd ed. Surrey: Gower Publishing Limited., pp. 7-18.

Watzlawick, P. Beavin Helmick, J., and Jackson, D. D. (2007). Some tentative axioms of

communication. In: R. T. Craig, H. L. Muller, ed., Theorizing Communication: Readings

Across Traditions, 1st ed. Los Angeles: Sage Publications., pp. 275-288.

Welch, M. (2012). Appropriateness and acceptability: employee perspective of internal

communication. Journal of Public relations review Volume 38:246-254.

Welch, M. and Jackson, P, R. (2007). Rethinking internal communication: a stakeholder

approach. Corporate Communications: An International Journal Volume 12(2):177-198.

West, M, A. and Hirst, G. (2003). Cooperation and Teamwork for innovation. In: M. West,

D. Tjosvold, and K. G. Smith, ed., International handbook of organizational teamwork and

cooperative working, 1st ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern

Gate., pp. 297-320.

Internet

European commission, Corporate social responsibility (CSR) Available at:

http://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/corporate-social-responsibility/index_en.htm

Accessed: 160107

33

Appendix 1

Intervju formulär/interview form

Ämnesområden

1. Bakgrundsinformation

1.1 Kan du kort beskriva din bakgrund? Utbildning etc.

1.2 Hur kom det sig att du började arbeta i den här organisationen?

2. Projektet

2.1 Startfråga

2.1.1 Jag håller på med en studie om er organisations horisontella intern kommunikation

och jag är intresserad av hur ni arbetade i projekt X som jag vet att du har vart med i. Kan

du berätta mer om vad det projektet handlade om?

2.2 Samarbete

2.2.1 Vad försvårar och underlättar samarbete i projektet?

2.2.2 Finns det erfarenheter av spänningar/olikheter vad det gäller olika enheters synsätt på

målsättningar inom organisationen?

2.2.3 Gemensamma riktlinjer inom projektet

2.3 Kommunikation

2.3.1 När, hur, varför

2.3.2 Diskussionsforums

2.3.3 Förståelse av varandras information

2.3.4 Spänningar mellan individer

2.4 Miljö

2.4.1 Miljömässiga mål och åtaganden finns det inom organisationen?

2.4.2 Hur prioriterar man miljöaspekter i projektet?

3. Övriga kommentarer